Polynomials with Multiple Zeros and Solvable Dynamical Systems Including Models in the Plane with Polynomial Interactions

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Polynomials with Multiple Zeros and Solvable Dynamical Systems Including Models in the Plane with Polynomial Interactions 462PolsWithMultiplZerosAndSolvDynSyst181216Rev Polynomials with Multiple Zeros and Solvable Dynamical Systems including Models in the Plane with Polynomial Interactions Francesco Calogeroa,b,1 and Farrin Payandeha,c,2 a Physics Department, University of Rome ”La Sapienza”, Rome, Italy b INFN, Sezione di Roma 1 c Department of Physics, Payame Noor University (PNU), PO BOX 19395-3697 Tehran, Iran 1 [email protected], [email protected] 2 f [email protected], [email protected] Abstract The interplay among the time-evolution of the coefficients ym (t) and the zeros xn (t) of a generic time-dependent (monic) polynomial provides a conve- nient tool to identify certain classes of solvable dynamical systems. Recently this tool has been extended to the case of nongeneric polynomials characterized by the presence, for all time, of a single double zero; and subsequently signifi- cant progress has been made to extend this finding to the case of polynomials featuring a single zero of arbitrary multiplicity. In this paper we introduce an approach suitable to deal with the most general case, i. e. that of a nongeneric time-dependent polynomial with an arbitrary number of zeros each of which features, for all time, an arbitrary (time-independent) multiplicity. We then focus on the special case of a polynomial of degree 4 featuring only 2 different zeros and, by using a recently introduced additional twist of this approach, we thereby identify many new classes of solvable dynamical systems of the following type: (n) arXiv:1904.00496v1 [math-ph] 31 Mar 2019 x˙ n = P (x1, x2) , n =1, 2 , (n) with P (x1, x2) two polynomials in the two variables x1 (t) and x2 (t). 1 Introduction Notation 1.1. Hereafter t generally denotes time (the real independent vari- able); (partial) derivatives with respect to time are denoted by a superimposed dot, or in some case by appending as a subscript the independent variable t preceded by a comma; all dependent variables such as x, y, z (often equipped 1 with subscripts) are generally assumed to be complex numbers, unless otherwise indicated (it shall generally be clear from the context which of these and other quantities depend on the time t, as occasionally—but not always—explicitly indicated); parameters such as a, b, c, α, β, γ, A, etc. (often equipped with subscripts) are generally time-independent complex numbers; and indices such as n, m, j, ℓ are generally positive integers, with ranges explicitly indicated or clear from the context. Some time ago the idea has been exploited to identify dynamical systems which can be solved by using as a tool the relations between the time evolutions of the coefficients and the zeros of a generic time-dependent polynomial [1]. The basic idea of this approach is to relate the time-evolution of the N zeros xn (t) of a generic time-dependent polynomial pN (z; t) of degree N in its argument z, N N N N−m pN (z; t)= z + ym (t) z = [z − xn (t)] , (1) m=1 n=1 X Y to the time-evolution of its N coefficients ym (t). Indeed, if the time evolution of the N coefficients ym (t) is determined by a system of Ordinary Differential Equations (ODEs) which is itself solvable, then the corresponding time-evolution of the N zeros xn (t) is also solvable, via the following 3 steps: (i) given the initial values xn (0) , the corresponding initial values ym (0) can be obtained from the explicit formulas expressing the coefficients ym of a polynomial in terms of its zeros xn reading (for all time, hence in particular at t = 0) N M m ym (t) = (−1) [xnℓ (t)] , m =1, 2, ..., N ; (2) ≤ 1 2 m≤ ( ) 1 n <n X<...<n N ℓY=1 (ii) from the N values ym (0) thereby obtained, the N values ym (t) are then evaluated via the—assumedly solvable—system of ODEs satisfied by the N co- efficients ym (t); (iii) the N values xn (t)—i. e., the N solutions of the dynamical system satisfied by the N variables xn (t)—are then determined as the N zeros of the polynomial, see (1), itself known at time t in terms of its N coefficients ym (t) (the computation of the zeros of a known polynomial being an algebraic operation; of course generally explicitly performable only for polynomials of degree N ≤ 4). Remark 1-1. In this paper the term ”solvable” generally characterizes sys- tems of ODEs the initial-values of which are ”solvable by algebraic operations”— possibly including quadratures yielding implicit solutions, generally also requir- ing the evaluation of parameters via algebraic operations. And let us emphasize that, because of the algebraic but nonlinear character of the relations between the zeros and the coefficients of a polynomial, it is clear that, even to relatively trivial evolutions of the N coefficients ym (t) of a time-dependent polynomial, there correspond much less trivial evolutions of its N zeros xn (t). On the other hand the fact that a time evolution is algebraically solvable has important im- plications, generally excluding that it can be ”chaotic”, indeed in some cases allowing to infer important qualitative features of the time evolution, such as 2 the property to be isochronous or asymptotically isochronous (see for instance [2] [3] [4]). The viability of this technique to identify solvable dynamical systems de- pends of course on the availability of an explicit method to relate the time- evolution of the N zeros of a polynomial to the corresponding time-evolution of its N coefficients. Such a method was indeed provided in [1], opening the way to the identification of a vast class of algebraically solvable dynamical systems (see also [5] and references therein); but that approach was essentially restricted to the consideration of linear time evolutions of the coefficients ym (t). A development allowing to lift this quite strong restriction emerged relatively recently [6], by noticing the validity of the identity −1 N N x˙ = − (x − x ) y˙ (x )N−m (3) n n ℓ m n 6 m=1 ℓ=1Y, ℓ=n X h i which provides a convenient explicit relationship among the time evolutions of the N zeros xn (t) and the N coefficients ym (t) of the generic polynomial (1). This allowed a major enlargement of the class of algebraically solvable dynamical systems identifiable via this approach: for many examples see [7] and references therein. Remark 1-2. Analogous identities to (3) have been identified for higher time-derivatives [8] [9] [7]; but in this paper we restrict our treatment to dy- namical systems characterized by first-order ODEs, postponing the treatment of dynamical systems characterized by higher-order ODEs (see Section 6). A new twist of this approach was then provided by its extension to non- generic polynomials featuring—for all time—multiple zeros. The first step in this direction focussed on time-dependent polynomials featuring for all time a single double zero [10]; and subsequently significant progress has been made to treat the case of polynomials featuring a single zero of arbitrary multiplic- ity [11]. In Section 2 of the present paper a convenient method is provided which is suitable to treat the most general case of polynomials featuring an ar- bitrary number of zeros each of which features an arbitrary multiplicity. While all these developments might appear to mimic scholastic exercises analogous to the discussion among medieval scholars of how many angels might dance simul- taneously on the point of a needle, they do indeed provide new tools to identify new dynamical systems featuring interesting time evolutions (including systems displaying remarkable behaviors such as isochrony or asymptotic isochrony: see for instance [10] [11]); dynamical systems which—besides their intrinsic mathe- matical interest—are quite likely to play significant roles in applicative contexts. Such developments shall be reported in future publications. In the present paper we focus on another twist of this approach to identify new solvable dy- namical systems which was introduced quite recently [12]. It is again based on the relations among the time-evolution of the coefficients and the zeros of time- dependent polynomials [6] [7] with multiple roots (see [10], [11] and above); but (as in [12]) by restricting attention to such polynomials featuring only 2 zeros. 3 Again, this might seem such a strong limitation to justify the doubt that the results thereby obtained be of much interest. But the effect of this restriction is to open the possibility to identify algebraically solvable dynamical models characterized by the following system of 2 ODEs, (n) x˙ n = P (x1, x2) , n =1, 2 , (4) (n) with P (x1, x2) two polynomials in the two dependent variables x1 (t) and x2 (t); hence systems of considerable interest, both from a theoretical and an applicative point of view (see [12] and references quoted there). This develop- ment is detailed in the following Section 3 by treating a specific example. In Section 4 we report—without detailing their derivation, which is rather obvious on the basis of the treatment provided in Section 3—many other such solvable models (see (4); but in some cases the right-hand side of these equations are not quite polynomial); and a simple technique allowing additional extensions of these models—making them potentially more useful in applicative contexts—is outlined in Section 5, by detailing its applicability in a particularly interesting case. Hence researchers primarily interested in applications of such systems of ODEs might wish to take first of all a quick look at these 2 sections. Finally, Section 6 outlines future developments of this research line; and some material useful for the treatment provided in the body of this paper is reported in 2 Appendices.
Recommended publications
  • The International System of Units (SI) - Conversion Factors For
    NIST Special Publication 1038 The International System of Units (SI) – Conversion Factors for General Use Kenneth Butcher Linda Crown Elizabeth J. Gentry Weights and Measures Division Technology Services NIST Special Publication 1038 The International System of Units (SI) - Conversion Factors for General Use Editors: Kenneth S. Butcher Linda D. Crown Elizabeth J. Gentry Weights and Measures Division Carol Hockert, Chief Weights and Measures Division Technology Services National Institute of Standards and Technology May 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Carlo M. Gutierrez, Secretary Technology Administration Robert Cresanti, Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology William Jeffrey, Director Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this document in order to describe an experimental procedure or concept adequately. Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best available for the purpose. National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publications 1038 Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Spec. Pub. 1038, 24 pages (May 2006) Available through NIST Weights and Measures Division STOP 2600 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-2600 Phone: (301) 975-4004 — Fax: (301) 926-0647 Internet: www.nist.gov/owm or www.nist.gov/metric TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD.................................................................................................................................................................v
    [Show full text]
  • The Multiple Polynomial Quadratic Sieve
    MATHEMATICS OF COMPUTATION VOLUME 48. NUMBER 177 JANUARY 1987, PAGES 329-339 The Multiple Polynomial Quadratic Sieve By Robert D. Silverman For Daniel Shanks on the occasion of his 10 th birthday Abstract. A modification, due to Peter Montgomery, of Pomerance's Quadratic Sieve for factoring large integers is discussed along with its implementation. Using it, allows factoriza- tion with over an order of magnitude less sieving than the basic algorithm. It enables one to factor numbers in the 60-digit range in about a day, using a large minicomputer. The algorithm has features which make it well adapted to parallel implementation. 1. Introduction. The basic quadratic sieve algorithm has origins which date back to M. Kraitchik, but was first explicitly stated and analyzed by C. Pomerance. The only two reported implementations of this algorithm were done by J. Gerver at Rutgers and J. Davis and D. Holdridge at Sandia National Laboratories. The latter used a Cray-1 to factor some numbers in the 60-70 digit range from the 'Cunningham Project'. They also used a Cray XMP to factor the then 'MOST WANTED' number (1071 - l)/9 in 9.5 hours. While some of the arguments that follow have been detailed by Pomerance elsewhere [9], we present ours in a manner which is more oriented towards implementation of the algorithm. The basic algorithm depends on constructing a solution to the following equation, where TVis the number you wish to factor: (1) A2 = B2modN. If A # B and A # -B mod N, then (A + B, N) and (A - B, N) are proper factors of TV.
    [Show full text]
  • Units and Conversions the Metric System Originates Back to the 1700S in France
    Numeracy Introduction to Units and Conversions The metric system originates back to the 1700s in France. It is known as a decimal system because conversions between units are based on powers of ten. This is quite different to the Imperial system of units where every conversion has a unique value. A physical quantity is an attribute or property of a substance that can be expressed in a mathematical equation. A quantity, for example the amount of mass of a substance, is made up of a value and a unit. If a person has a mass of 72kg: the quantity being measured is Mass, the value of the measurement is 72 and the unit of measure is kilograms (kg). Another quantity is length (distance), for example the length of a piece of timber is 3.15m: the quantity being measured is length, the value of the measurement is 3.15 and the unit of measure is metres (m). A unit of measurement refers to a particular physical quantity. A metre describes length, a kilogram describes mass, a second describes time etc. A unit is defined and adopted by convention, in other words, everyone agrees that the unit will be a particular quantity. Historically, the metre was defined by the French Academy of Sciences as the length between two marks on a platinum-iridium bar at 0°C, which was designed to represent one ten-millionth of the distance from the Equator to the North Pole through Paris. In 1983, the metre was redefined as the distance travelled by light 1 in free space in of a second.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimating Concrete Amounts
    PennDOT LTAP technical INFORMATION SHEET Estimating Concrete Amounts #143 When working on a local project involving concrete, nobody wants to suffer the consequences of F A L L / 2 0 1 0 either not ordering enough concrete to finish a job or getting too much and wasting money and excess material. But using concrete in a local project doesn’t have to end in either scenario. Municipalities can determine the precise amount of concrete needed for any type of project once they learn how to calculate the quantity using some basic math formulas. If you know the length, width, and height of the space that you want to fill with concrete, then you can plug those measurements into a simple formula (length x width x height = volume) to get the precise quantity of concrete needed for a project. UNDERSTANDING THE MATH To start, let’s review a little bit about math. Convert to common units. Before you begin your calculations for volume, you must convert all measurements into common units (such as inches, feet, yards, etc). How would you multiply 11 feet times 6 inches, for example? Obviously, you must convert either the 11 feet into inches or the 6 inches into a decimal part of a foot. Inches into feet—Converting the 6 inches into a decimal part of a foot is the preferred choice since Calculating the Volume for Ordering Concrete in our English system of measurements, the “foot” 1. Convert all measurements into common units (usually into feet). If there are any is the base unit of measurement.
    [Show full text]
  • Dimensional Analysis
    Dimensional Analysis Math 98 Supplement 2 LEARNING OBJECTIVE 1. Convert one unit of measure to another. Often measurements are taken using different units. In order for one measurement to be compared to another, it is necessary to convert one unit of measurement to another. For instance, suppose you are visiting Bellingham from Canada. You see the speed limit sign indicating 60mph. How fast should you driving in kilometers per hour? Or, if your height is 165centimeters how tall are in in inches? “I am 165 cm. How tall am I in inches?” This problem is an example of unit conversion. You are trying to change one unit (centimeters) to another (inches). To convert a unit, you need conversion equations. These equations tell you how different units are related to one another. For example, these are all examples of conversion equations: From these equations we get what are called conversion factors. Note that these conversion factors (fractions) all equal 1 since the numerator and the denominator of each fraction are equal. You will multiply the quantity with one unit by these conversion factors so that you can eliminate the unwanted units and go to the unit you wish to obtain without changing the original quantity described. (Multiplying a quantity by 1 will not change the original quantity, right? ) Let’s try this problem of converting 165cm to inches using conversion factor!!! 1 Example 1 165 cm = _______ inches. (Use the conversion equation, 2.54 cm = 1 inch.) Step 1: Write the quantity you are trying to convert as a fraction. That is, write 165cm as Step 2: Decide by which conversion factor you need to multiply the above fraction in order to eliminate the “cm” from the numerator.
    [Show full text]
  • Integer-Programming Model Is One of the Most Important Models in Management Science
    Integer Programming 9 The linear-programming models that have been discussed thus far all have been continuous, in the sense that decision variables are allowed to be fractional. Often this is a realistic assumption. For instance, we might 3 easily produce 102 4 gallons of a divisible good such as wine. It also might be reasonable to accept a solution 1 giving an hourly production of automobiles at 58 2 if the model were based upon average hourly production, and the production had the interpretation of production rates. At other times, however, fractional solutions are not realistic, and we must consider the optimization problem: n X Maximize c j x j , j=1 subject to: n X ai j x j = bi (i = 1, 2,..., m), j=1 x j ≥ 0 ( j = 1, 2,..., n), x j integer (for some or all j = 1, 2,..., n). This problem is called the (linear) integer-programming problem. It is said to be a mixed integer program when some, but not all, variables are restricted to be integer, and is called a pure integer program when all decision variables must be integers. As we saw in the preceding chapter, if the constraints are of a network nature, then an integer solution can be obtained by ignoring the integrality restrictions and solving the resulting linear program. In general, though, variables will be fractional in the linear-programming solution, and further measures must be taken to determine the integer-programming solution. The purpose of this chapter is twofold. First, we will discuss integer-programming formulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Math Review
    NEWCOLORs_basic_math_rev 3/31/08 3:52 PM Page 1 Basic Math Review Key Words and Symbols Integers (continued) Fractions (continued) Rates, Ratios, Proportions, The following words and symbols are used for the and Percents MULTIPLYING AND DIVIDING WITH NEGATIVES operations listed. # Equivalent fractions are found by multiplying the numerator -a b =-ab and denominator of the fraction by the same number. In the RATES AND RATIOS Addition previous example, - # - = A rate is a comparison of two quantities with different units. Numbers Important Properties Sum, total, increase, plus a b ab # # - 2 2 4 8 1 1 3 3 For example, a car that travels 110 miles in 2 hours is mov- a = a = = and = = . addend addend = sum # # ing at a rate of 110 miles/2 hours or 55 mph. NATURAL NUMBERS PROPERTIES OF ADDITION -b b 3 3 4 12 4 4 3 12 Subtraction a A ratio is a comparison of two quantities with the same {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, …} Identity Property of Zero: a + 0 = a -a , b =- Difference, decrease, minus b MULTIPLYING AND DIVIDING FRACTIONS units. For example, a class with 23 students has a WHOLE NUMBERS Inverse Property: a + -a = 0 When multiplying and dividing fractions, a common student–teacher ratio of 23:1 or23 . 1 2 minuend subtrahend = difference Some examples: 1 denominator is not needed. To multiply, take the product {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, …} + = + Multiplication - # =- Commutative Property: a b b a 3 5 15 of the numerators and the product of the denominators: PROPORTIONS Product, of, times -7 -6 = 42 # INTEGERS Associative Property: a + b + c = a + b + c 1 21 2 a # c a c ac A proportion is a statement in which two ratios or rates are 1 2 1 2 * # - - = = = {…, Ϫ3, Ϫ2, Ϫ1, 0, 1, 2, …} a b, a b, a b , ab 24 8 3 # equal.
    [Show full text]
  • Rational Expressions - Least Common Denominators
    7.3 Rational Expressions - Least Common Denominators Objective: Idenfity the least common denominator and build up denominators to match this common denominator. As with fractions, the least common denominator or LCD is very important to working with rational expressions. The process we use to find the LCD is based on the process used to find the LCD of intergers. Example 1. FindtheLCDof 8 and 6 Consider multiples of the larger number 8, 16, 24 . 24 is the first multiple of 8 that is also divisible by 6 24 Our Solution When finding the LCD of several monomials we first find the LCD of the coeffi- cients, then use all variables and attach the highest exponent on each variable. Example 2. FindtheLCDof 4x2 y5 and 6x4y3z 6 First find the LCD of coefficients 4 and 6 12 12istheLCDof 4 and 6 x 4y5z 6 Use all variables with highest exponents on each variable 12x 4y5z 6 Our Solution The same pattern can be used on polynomials that have more than one term. However, we must first factor each polynomial so we can identify all the factors to be used (attaching highest exponent if necessary). Example 3. FindtheLCDof x2 + 2x − 3 and x2 − x − 12 Factoreachpolynomial ( x − 1)( x + 3) and ( x − 4)( x + 3) LCD uses all unique factors ( x − 1)( x + 3)( x − 4) Our Solution Notice we only used ( x + 3) once in our LCD. This is because it only appears as a factor once in either polynomial. The only time we need to repeat a factor or use an exponent on a factor is if there are exponents when one of the polynomials is factored 1 Example 4.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. CUSTOMARY UNITS GENERAL PRIMER California Department of Transportation
    Revised August 2, 2005 METRIC UNITS TO U.S. CUSTOMARY UNITS GENERAL PRIMER California Department of Transportation CONTENTS I. Purpose II. U.S. Survey Foot Table 1 – Exact Conversion Factors III. Generalized Conversion Tables Table 2 – Approximate Conversion Factors Table 3 – Rationalized Speed Table 4 – Rationalized Fractional Inch IV. English Standards Table 5 – U.S. Customary Conversion Factors Table 6 – Computer-Aided Design and Drafting V. Soft and Hard Conversion VI. Rounding, Significant Digits and Accuracy VII. Technical and Specification Writing Conventions for U.S. Customary Units 1 of 15 GENERAL PRIMER Metric Units to U.S. Customary Units Revised August 2, 2005 I. Purpose This Primer is the Department’s basic guide for conversion from Metric units to U.S. Customary units. The tables and information contained herein serve as a primer or introduction to U.S. Customary units and conversion factors as well as some engineering considerations. The Metric to English Transition Team developed the Primer. The Primer is a compilation of information from a number of reliable sources and reflects Team consensus. A preponderance of existing private and government publications deal exclusively with transition from U.S. Customary units to Metric units, not Metric to U.S. Customary. Metric to U.S. Customary transition is unique, hence the need for this Primer. U.S. Customary units (a.k.a. “inch-pound” or “pound-inch” units) are defined by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). (Web address: http://ts.nist.gov/ts/htdocs/200/202/mpo_home.htm) Users should become familiar with NIST and other equally reliable sources to obtain knowledge and skills exceeding the scope of this Primer.
    [Show full text]